Posted on 04/18/2003 6:53:53 AM PDT by stainlessbanner
FRee dixie,sw
I don't know how much more combat soldier you can get than that. I have no idea if he appears on the muster roll or not, since I'm not sure of his last name.
FRee dixie,sw
I should therefore prefer to rely upon our white population to preserve the ratio between our forces and those of the enemy, which experience has shown to be safe. But in view of the preparations of our enemies, it is our duty to provide for continued war and not for a battle or a campaign, and I fear that we cannot accomplish this without overtaxing the capacity of our white population.
If Lee's army was so integrated then why would he be saying he preferred a white army this late in the war? Wouldn't that mean that he would be ignoring the contribution of those 100,000 black soldiers you claim was part of the army since day 1?
And while we're at it, if roughly 10% of the confederate army was already black then why would this legislation be passed in March 1865?
SECTION 1. The Congress of the Confederate States of America do enact, That the President of the Confederate States be and he is hereby authorized to receive into the military service, any number of negro troops not to exceed two hundred thousand.
SEC. 2. That the President be and he is authorized, to assign officers already appointed, or make appointments of officers, to raise and command said troops; and the same, when raised, shall be organized as provided under existing laws.
SEC. 3. That no negro slave shall be received into the service without the written consent of his owner and under such regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of War to carry into effect this act.
SEC. 4. That it is hereby declared, that Congress does not hereby assume to change the social and political status of the slave population of the States, but leaves the same under the jurisdiction and control of the States to which it belongs.
So why the special legislation authorizing 200,000 black troops, free and slave, if hundreds of thousands of blacks were already serving? And by the way, you'll notice that slaves weren't offered any sort of incentive for joining. Not freedom or anything else. Why, do you think? And those troops that were raised, why do you suppose they speak of a parade of 5 companies, two white and three black if units were integrated like you say? Does integration mean white and black companies within a regiment?
I know that I'm not going to get any sort of intelligible answer out of you, but I have to ask.
it comes to this: the "leadership" of the PACSA did NOT favor blacks in gray, BUT the state, privately-raised & local units did not care a damn what they thought. Richmond & even Marse Robert were FAR AWAY and out-of-mind to the average local commander.
in the midst of a war for liberty, you do NOT turn down ANY good fighter, no matter what his/her skin tone.
furthermore, i'd like one of you yankee apologists to give me a straight answer on this question: are the THOUSANDS of service records of black CSA veterans at the US Archives AND the pension records at state offices in the southland real or false?
if you say real, doesn't that make you look silly?
if false, who put false records in the archives & state archives?
you can't have it both ways.
FRee dixie,sw
because the legislation allplied only to the PACSA!
it did NOT apply to the local,state & partisan rangers EVER.
FRee dixie,sw
You have misunderstood what the legislation is. It is a labor impressment act, only addressing the issue of labor. Prior to this legislation the Confederate government had to contract the use of slaves directly from their owners, as it was not legal to impress someone's slaves into government service for the uses described. The owners could retrieve their slaves practically at any time, which they often did when they were needed again to do work at the owner's property. This meant the government did not have a constant or reliable supply of labor, and was continuously trying to contract labor to not only meet the original quotas, but make up for the ones that had been recalled by their owners as well. The need for adequate labor resources to build defenses and fortifications, etc., was a critical issue, and this act gave the government the authority to directly impress slaves in order to meet their labor requirements instead of contracting out slaves as had been done before. It is only a labor act dealing with labor issues.
The only groups of blacks that hate the South are those that would lose their power over the masses once the truth comes out to the point that they can't cover it up. As evidenced by the many books already out there, sooner or later, the revisionist history will fall, and lincoln will be put in his proper place. On the garbage heap of history
A good basic article to start on is by Walter Williams.
Of course on the other hand, we always have the history of James Mcpherson who defiantly denies the existence of these brave men. But he's too busy giving interviews to questionable groups to say the least
The only difference is that nothing in the Confederate Constitution banned blacks fighting for the South, whereas the US Constitution did ban Presidents from starting wars without asking Congress
They weren't shy about ignoring other legalities, if GOPconservative is to be believed. And why pass it three years later? Unless, of course, blacks in the army were rare, unofficial, in a support role only, and not acknowledged by the high command? You think that might be it?
One third of the confederate army was impressed, most of the rest were on extended enlistments. So if they are impressed labor only then why the uniforms? Why specify what they may do and, by implication, keep them from doing other, combat related actions. And why the need a year later, to pass legislation authorizing the enlistment of 200,000 more? The fact of the matter was that any blacks with the army prior to this legislation were there in an unofficial, unauthorized capacity, and that they filled solely support roles.
Well if that were it, a whole bunch of yankees were lying about being shot at then by blacks. Well that and you're calling Frederick Douglass a liar along with more than one union officer
Actually it just said that the clothing was to be provided by the War Dept, since that's who they were working for. It was a long established practice that when a slave was contracted to or employed by someone other than the actual owner, then that person would be responsible for the slaves' clothing, etc.
Why specify what they may do and, by implication, keep them from doing other, combat related actions.
The government was trying to obtain labor, and it knew that if it used contracted slaves in combat the owners would never agree to contract their slaves out since they might be killed. The owners would have been even more upset if their slaves were impressed without their consent and then used in combat where they could be killed. This legislation was only designed to obtain labor, by contract and impressment, without causing too many protests from the large slave-owners from whom they were being taken or hired.
And why the need a year later, to pass legislation authorizing the enlistment of 200,000 more?
An entirely different piece of legislation dealing with an entirely different thing.
The fact of the matter was that any blacks with the army prior to this legislation were there in an unofficial, unauthorized capacity, and that they filled solely support roles.
Here we disagree (we both knew that, didn't we). I do agree that the majority of black Confederates operated in support roles, but very many also participated in combat roles. Just as slaves refused British offers of freedom and participated in gaining America's Independence, they supported their Southern homeland and families during the WBTS. Even Frederick Douglass said blacks fought for the Confederacy:
"It is now pretty well established, that there are at the present moment many colored men in the Confederate army doing duty not only as cooks, servants and laborers, but as real soldiers, having muskets on their shoulders, and bullets in their pockets, ready to shoot down loyal troops, and do all that soldiers may to destroy the Federal Government and build up that of the traitors and rebels. There were such soldiers at Manassas, and they are probably there still...Rising above vulgar prejudice, the slaveholding rebel accepts the aid of the black man as readily as that of any other." - Frederick Douglass
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.